Hi,
I'm in a crossroad here. I own the HG-2 non MS version and thinking to upgrade to the MS version. However, I came across the Kelvin Tone Shaper and seems quite nice. Should I get the Kelvin instead if I already own the HG-2 non MS?
Thanks.
hc.
Kelvin Tone Shaper vs Blackbox HG-2 MS
-
- KVRian
- 677 posts since 14 Mar, 2006
I really like HG-2MS, but I would go with Kelvin first. Kelvin is now M/S and parallel capable. Plus, it has far more harmonics options (models of various high end gear), superior oversampling options, and a unique harmonics spread feature.
Of course, probably best to demo each of them yourself for perspective.
Of course, probably best to demo each of them yourself for perspective.
If less is more, imagine how much more MORE will be.
-
- KVRAF
- 3086 posts since 4 May, 2012
I would definitely go with Kelvin to expand your tonal options.
There must be a method to set up mid/side processing in your DAW and then save as a template.
There must be a method to set up mid/side processing in your DAW and then save as a template.
-
- KVRAF
- 1637 posts since 28 Jul, 2006
Kelvin is much better than the black box, from my limited time trying the black box.
I'm using multiple instances of kelvin in every mix.
I think something like goodhertz tupe is a better comparison/competitor as far as sound quality (although tupe and Kelvin don't really sound the same and are complimentary)
I'm using multiple instances of kelvin in every mix.
I think something like goodhertz tupe is a better comparison/competitor as far as sound quality (although tupe and Kelvin don't really sound the same and are complimentary)
Last edited by briefcasemanx on Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRist
- 285 posts since 28 Jun, 2017
-
- KVRian
- 631 posts since 10 Jan, 2017
HG-2 has a certain tone I don't really get with Kelvin, and visa versa... I'd demo both and blind test if you can. Ultimately though Kelvin is more versatile.
-
Scarlet Pumpernickel Scarlet Pumpernickel https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=402106 - KVRist
- 266 posts since 30 Jul, 2017
I have both and I would personally go with Kelvin. I don't think HG-2MS is at all bad, but Kelvin, at the very least,gives me more options.
-
midi_transmission midi_transmission https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=298730
- KVRian
- 1045 posts since 13 Feb, 2013
I started a similar topic about HG-2 in general.
In the last days I compared HG-2 with a lot of other saturator plugins. Kelvin was one of them. You can tweak so much that it's not easy to give absolute result. But I feel there is a character. HG-2 MS sounds a but rougher, grainier, with sharper transients. It works better when used subtle, I don't like the HG-2 sound when pushed a lot. Kelvin sounds more expensive and smoother, the saturation sounds more complex. I can't say that one is better, they are different.
In the last days I compared HG-2 with a lot of other saturator plugins. Kelvin was one of them. You can tweak so much that it's not easy to give absolute result. But I feel there is a character. HG-2 MS sounds a but rougher, grainier, with sharper transients. It works better when used subtle, I don't like the HG-2 sound when pushed a lot. Kelvin sounds more expensive and smoother, the saturation sounds more complex. I can't say that one is better, they are different.